[Jason Schreier / Bloomberg] Next Assassin's Creed is AC Infinity (update: confirmed by Ubisoft)
- Thread starter Patitoloco
- Start date
Valhalla also sold very well. However GoT took 5 years to make. At best you are looking at a 3 year development cycle for the next AC game which leaves them with a massive hole in their portfolio. WD has largely been a disappointment. TD2 was a disaster. So they are left with AC and FC as their big franchises with R6S being the backbone of their portfolio. Considering the growth of the videogame industry over the last decade off the backs of mtxs/GaaS I think it's hard to argue against it from a business perspective.
Is this a I only read the headline thing again? "to play multiple AC games both big and small."
Sounds like the thing most of you here actually want, a smaller game like the older ones.
Also the second tweet seems kinda thread worthy.
Ghosts straight up has a regularly updated multiplayer mode with timed events that maintains interest in the title while they worked on the $20 expansion, $30 if you want the native PS5 version since you can't buy the native version unless it's the Director's Cut that includes the expansion. SP is in on the game too. Very few developers are releasing game and not maintaining interest post release in not just the base game but also the IP. Hell God of War was a rare exception if only because the scale of what they wanted to do post release would've resulted in a Lost Legacy release.
That's the current state of the industry with multiple publishers having their own take on post release revenue and IP interest. JFO's devs didn't release a whole new challenge mode, free costumes, and new game+ primarily out of the goodness of the developer's hearts. It's all because titles like The Order 1886 don't really worth it from a finance standpoint.
Live service=/=multiplayer. Ex: the last three AC games were live service titles.
There's absolutely no mention about it being just multiplayer. Could as well be a continuation of the last AC games.
OP
OP
You can be a live service game and also be single player.
They're not exclusive.
The AC live service is not surprising nor all that different from their current approach. Why so many here act like it's a big deal is beyond me?
On the other hand the abuser thing seems much more noteworthy. I wish the best for the employees putting up with that shit.
On the other hand the abuser thing seems much more noteworthy. I wish the best for the employees putting up with that shit.
Cool, thanks for making sure I won't pay anywhere close to full price for this, Ubisoft. Good lookin' out.
After how bad Legion turned out to be I really have zero interest in keeping an AC game installed on my hard drive for six months waiting for unsatisfying "content drops". Especially if I'm asked to pay $70 up front to do so.
After how bad Legion turned out to be I really have zero interest in keeping an AC game installed on my hard drive for six months waiting for unsatisfying "content drops". Especially if I'm asked to pay $70 up front to do so.
None of that is anywhere near what this looks to be. Or anything like an R6:Siege or any game built around live service needs. Ghost isn't that. A crash isn't happening.
This is extra disappointing after that tantalizing leak about the next AC being set in Samarkand during Timur Empire and you following a character across their entire life again from slave child --> master assassin a la Ezio's story. I would have injected that straight into my veins. This... not so much. Also Ubisoft is an incredibly gross company with how they are handling sexual predators in the workplace.
The last three AC games are live service games if that gives you any indication of what they'd do with live service AC and how they would expand on that. I have no idea how we're as a community still stuck on the idea that live service only=multiplayer or multiplayer focus when we've had damn near half a decade of live service SP titles further and further testing the waters and defining how that could be profitable too.
There are plenty of reasons to dislike live service games. I liked Origins because they kept those features light but I thought they went too far with Odyssey. That game went too far with the mandatory grind of repeatitive boring side missions. What I'm surprised by are the people who thought that was ok but are suddenly checking out now.
Yeah, I've played them all. Fell off of Valhalla because it's more that than the two before it and it shows. If that's the future...I can't get behind it. Maybe they surprise me though.
It should be noted that Odyssey was designed that way regardless of the MTs. And that stuff like time savers had existed in AC games five years prior to Odyssey.
Valhalla's more lenient than Odyssey even though it has a larger scope. It did have much longer and bigger planned post release support but that doesn't mean that the game feels compromised if you like, ignore timed events or don't buy the expansions. Literally the biggest complaint I see about it from people who didn't enjoy their time with it is that it's too big of a game to begin with.
OP
OP
AC is already a live service series. So expect more of what they have already done in the last three games.
So the natural evolution of what they tried to do over the course of the last games. AC is well on it's way in this direction since many years
Daily missions, some mythical DLC that differed a bit from the main game adding new areas to explore. With it's store fronts, purcheasable currency. Valhalla getting updates and DLC over a 2 year span... not sure why people are getting caught off guard. This is the direction since Origins.
Daily missions, some mythical DLC that differed a bit from the main game adding new areas to explore. With it's store fronts, purcheasable currency. Valhalla getting updates and DLC over a 2 year span... not sure why people are getting caught off guard. This is the direction since Origins.
live service doesn't have to just mean loot, but loot is a big part of the new AC titles.
I imagine it'll be a combination of having live activities for loot, new story content, new regions and maps............literally like the last 3 games.
The only difference is that the scope and scale of the updates might be as large as "here's a brand new open world" and it would be as if your buying a new AC game, instead of a DLC to an already existing game.
I guess I could've seen this coming, they were clearly moving in this direction with making the last three entries long af and kept "alive" with periodic downloadable content, timed quests and all that stuff. Oh well, I did not like the direction this IP was going since Odyssey, so this is only solidifying that opinion in my mind. It was good while it lasted.
That's where it lost me as well. I assumed they made it bigger than ever to have players keep buying shit and keep exploring areas they hadn't been. There's nothing of value in it for me. Odyssey strained my attention by the end and I rushed the story to be done, but I saw what it was doing. Always avoided buying anything. Each of the three did something for me, but each was lacking in key areas. I'm not their core audience anymore. I get it.
Officially announced by Ubisoft
An Update on Assassin’s Creed Infinity and the Future of the Assassin’s Creed Franchise
Learn more about how our teams are evolving to prepare Assassin’s Creed for the future.
news.ubisoft.com
OP
OP
I fully believe the balancing of that game was designed around microtransactions. I tried to circumvent the grind as much as possible but I was constantly underleveled and fighting enemies that where the spongiest motherfuckers I have ever experienced in a game.
Not trying to sound like one of those angry gamer types but that's genuinely how I feel. I really wanted to like Odyssey.
An Update on Assassin’s Creed Infinity and the Future of the Assassin’s Creed Franchise
Learn more about how our teams are evolving to prepare Assassin’s Creed for the future.
Quickly throw up a blog so that they become the news source for this info instead of Bloomberg, the one that mentions the abuse/toxicity allegations. I see.
I think for most people an Assassin's Creed game is so big that they play it on and off until the next one comes out. I can see the logic in going back to annual releases of smaller games (or expansions in this case) and just adding them to the live service instead of as individual releases as it wilds allow faster development and the ability to re-use existing maps. However, unless they charge the price of a full game for each expansion then I don't know how this makes financial sense without egregious MTX schemes.
they seem to be betting the entire future of the company on this, and in all likelyhood the "radically different" next entry in the Far Cry series after 6, will also go in this direction.
An Update on Assassin’s Creed Infinity and the Future of the Assassin’s Creed Franchise
Learn more about how our teams are evolving to prepare Assassin’s Creed for the future.
If only they were this fast to respond to harassment allegations.
I mean look at most AAA IP at the moment and how they compare to the studio's previous work. Most everything is designed to keep your attention for far longer than before. Like you named GoT as an example but think about just how long that game is compared to Infamous SS. Which you could handily get through in a weekend. Compare God of War, Gaers 5, or TLOU2, all of which are cinematic SP games where the characters literally have dialogue saying "we could continue the main story OR we could explore this mini open world to get upgrades and lore" to the last entries in those IPs. One of the most hyped games this year, that I'm personally hyped for, is Halo Infinite and it will most likely be exactly like that without going full open world
halo. All depends on what you want from a game. I find it as valid an approach as a linear title.
So there likely won't be another AC game before this releases? That sucks, I love this franchise. Other people can have their sports games or yearly Call of Duty, I love diving into a new AC every year or two